A God thought experiment

[Zeno]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think it's necessary or desirable to try to reconcile the Bible with science.

[/ QUOTE ]

Since you have this correct, why do you continually post on this forum or continually deal with questions of science? You should disregard the science and simply present the Central Christian messages of love, forgiveness of others, compassion, giving, and salvation.

It has always appeared odd to me that many Christians spend so much time and energy on something that is quite honestly not that important to the central message of Christianity. You and many others have spent an inordinate amount of time spinning your wheels on this forum without much good effect. In my opinion, your tone is sometimes very bad; your approach in presenting the Christian message lacks quality and at times actually is a disservice to your religious convictions. You cannot force faith into people or continually rely on debating tactics to present your message. This is not the best way to “win” or give out the Gospel. You need to let go of pride and allow God and the Holy Spirit to provide the words that will be best in presenting Christianity. Of course I realize that this is the SMP forum so this limits how some concepts can be presented. But within those limits you could do a much better job. I know I could. In fact, I may start to take the Christian side just to illustrate my point.

-Zeno, The Antipope

[Duke]

I think NR just proved via argument that only a very stupid god would try to do what he "did" (revealing his message, or whatever) at all.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Since you have this correct, why do you continually post on this forum or continually deal with questions of science?


[/ QUOTE ]

One of the most common objections to Christianity is that it contradicts science. I don't think I've ever tried to show how the Bible teaches science. I do try to show that there is no real conflict.

I think this is important because I present a concrete view of God, the God Who reveals Himself in His Word. If His Word is unreliable the whole thing disintegrates.

I also think most of my posts have not been concerning science at all. When I mock Dawkins it's mostly concerning his ignorance on that which isn't science. When I argue for God's existence it's usually in the moral realm, or the logical.

My OP here isn't really about science, it's about how to read God's Word. Why is it written the way it is and not like a science textbook?

[ QUOTE ]

In my opinion, your tone is sometimes very bad; your approach in presenting the Christian message lacks quality and at times actually is a disservice to your religious convictions


[/ QUOTE ]

I won't argue with that at all. "I am a man of unclean lips and I dwell among a people of unclean lips".

[ QUOTE ]

In fact, I may start to take the Christian side just to illustrate my point.


[/ QUOTE ]

"Even the devil can appear as an angel of light".

[Taraz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If God is deliberately a little bit vague about scientific stuff then he is probably also a little bit vague about other stuff. And if pinninng him down about scientific stuff is wrong, then why isn't it wrong to try to pin him down about other stuff like this fellow Calvin apparently tried to?


[/ QUOTE ]

Because He wanted us to do science but also wanted us to know about Him, us and salvation. You can be wrong about science with generally no negative effect - not so when it comes to His will for your life and your eternal fate.

[/ QUOTE ]

How you can be so sure of this position I will never understand. Perhaps you misunderstood Him as well? Clearly Christians were "wrong" about certain theological aspects of Christianity and there was no negative effect.

David, two great responses in this thread. Well said.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

How you can be so sure of this position I will never understand. Perhaps you misunderstood Him as well? Clearly Christians were "wrong" about certain theological aspects of Christianity and there was no negative effect.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is completely opaque to me. A farmer needs to know precisely zero about nuclear physics. He needs to know as much as possible about the condition and future of his soul. Being wrong about physics will make no difference to him ever, at any point of his life. Being wrong about what God says he needs to know concerning his soul will affect everything he is, now and forever.

[Taraz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

How you can be so sure of this position I will never understand. Perhaps you misunderstood Him as well? Clearly Christians were "wrong" about certain theological aspects of Christianity and there was no negative effect.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is completely opaque to me. A farmer needs to know precisely zero about nuclear physics. He needs to know as much as possible about the condition and future of his soul. Being wrong about physics will make no difference to him ever, at any point of his life. Being wrong about what God says he needs to know concerning his soul will affect everything he is, now and forever.

[/ QUOTE ]

One point is that you don't seem to account for the fact that you might be wrong about what God says.

The second point is that various churches have disagreed about what God says throughout history and they continue to adapt, revise, and update what they believe about God's word. So it seems that it is not possible to be 'correct' about what God says. This presumably does not have much of a negative effect.

[David Sklansky]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

How you can be so sure of this position I will never understand. Perhaps you misunderstood Him as well? Clearly Christians were "wrong" about certain theological aspects of Christianity and there was no negative effect.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is completely opaque to me. A farmer needs to know precisely zero about nuclear physics. He needs to know as much as possible about the condition and future of his soul. Being wrong about physics will make no difference to him ever, at any point of his life. Being wrong about what God says he needs to know concerning his soul will affect everything he is, now and forever.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe he was asking you not about science, but rather about the fact that you are so sure that other types of religious Christians have some things wrong.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

One point is that you don't seem to account for the fact that you might be wrong about what God says.


[/ QUOTE ]

I might be wrong about anything.

[ QUOTE ]

So it seems that it is not possible to be 'correct' about what God says. This presumably does not have much of a negative effect.


[/ QUOTE ]

The effect I'm concerned about here is the eternal destiny of the soul. Hard to say there's no negative effect if you get this part wrong.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

I believe he was asking you not about science, but rather about the fact that you are so sure that other types of religious Christians have some things wrong.


[/ QUOTE ]


I'm glad you brought this up because I want to tie it to an earlier response to you.

This is from Clement, bishop of Rome about 100 A.D. -

[ QUOTE ]

[Ch 32:4]:

"And we, therefore are not justified of ourselves or by our wisdom or insight or religious devotion or the holy deeds we have done from the heart, but by that faith by which almighty God has justified all men from the very beginning."


[Epistle to the Corinthians]:

"All the ancient fathers descended from Abraham, both before the Law and under the Law, were glorified and magnified, not through themselves, nor through their works of righteousness which they had done, but through His will. Therefore we, also, being called through His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified through ourselves, neither through our own wisdom, or understanding, or piety, or works which we have done in holiness of heart, but through faith, that faith through which the Almighty God hath justified all that ever lived; to whom be glory for ever, Amen!"


[/ QUOTE ]

Not much different from Calvin and Luther.

[Taraz]

[ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]

So it seems that it is not possible to be 'correct' about what God says. This presumably does not have much of a negative effect.


[/ QUOTE ]

The effect I'm concerned about here is the eternal destiny of the soul. Hard to say there's no negative effect if you get this part wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

You keep missing my point. I'm saying that what you must be claiming here is that millions of Christians who were following their church pastors and congregations must have gotten it wrong. You are essentially condemning the eternal destiny of their souls by saying that they got it wrong and you have it right.

If I died in 1500 A.D. I would have been screwed because I died before the Reformation. I would have been reaching toward God but getting it wrong because I was being misled by what was a corrupt church in your mind.